PRAMILA CHOUDHARI, L/H- SH. ASHOK KUMAR CHOUDHARY,ASHOK NAGAR vs. PCIT, GWALIOR, GWALIOR
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the impugned order passed against a dead person without proper substitution of legal heirs is a nullity in the eyes of law. Therefore, the order is set aside.
What were the facts?
The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax issued a notice under Section 263 against a deceased assessee. The assessee's death was communicated to the PCIT before the impugned order was passed.
What were the issues?
Whether an order passed under Section 263 against a deceased person without substitution of legal heirs is valid.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SMT ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
ORDER
Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 14.03.2022 passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Gwalior u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
None has appeared for the appellant/assessee. The respondent/Revenue is represented by Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Ld. CIT/DR.
The solitary effective ground raised by the appellant/assessee before us reveals that the core issue for adjudication in this appeal is as to whether the learned PCIT was justified in passing the impugned appellate order against a deceased person.
The appellant has submitted through the statement of facts that the notice u/s. 263 was issued by ld. PCIT on 11.01.2022 in the name of dead person, Ashok Kumar Choudhary (assessee) who already died on 10.05.2021 during Covid-19 outbreak and this crucial fact was communicated to the ld. PCIT on 19.01.2022, i.e., before passing the impugned order.
We note that the present appeal has been preferred by L.R. of the assessee late Shri Ashok Kumar Choudhary who is said to have died on 10.05.2021. The revision proceedings were continued against the dead person without proper substitution of the legal heirs as per procedure prescribed under the law, despite the factum of assessee’s death was communicated to the ld. PCIT during pendency of such proceedings.
These facts stand un-controverted on behalf of the Revenue.
Given the above facts of the case, the impugned order passed u/s. 263 of the Act against a dead person is nullity in the eye of law and is accordingly set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27.03.2025.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026